...well I know lieben hasnt changed then! (except some nice person put some new rap points in green gully). I onsighted the crux pitch of Echo crack.....with 7 number 3 cams.....(hardly onsight then!). Two days ago did a f.a of a different 45mtr crack truly onsight from ground up and without those little guidebook tips had to get very creative/stubborn for the last little while. Arent I just amazing.

On 11/08/2004 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:>On 10/08/2004 kieranl wrote:>>I don't think Noddy was on the first ascent of Lieben with Bryden, I>think>>it was Ted Batty.>You are right, and my memory stands corrected.>>It was back in 1962 ?

Yes, 1962 according to Bryden's "Guide to Rock-Climbs of NSW". See Chockstone thread advising this guide now available online;

On 5/10/2012 Wendy wrote:>So, who was it who started this thread who has subsequently done some enthusiastic>deleting of all of their posts?

Edward Frillypants.
He preceeded several others since, by quite a bit timewise, and it is one of the things that I have never fully understood about that type of action, as once a post is in the public domain, it is virtually there 'forever', in that sites like wayback can resurrect information that has been 'deleted'.
As far as Chocky goes, I reckon our corporate history is worth preserving, and the site is the poorer for such action.
~> If people are not prepared to 'own' their post / comments then they would be better off refraining from posting, instead of potentially corrupting threads as orphans down the line, or a series of non-sensical replies to posts that have been 'deleted'.

>Edward Frillypants.>He preceeded several others since, by quite a bit timewise, and it is>one of the things that I have never fully understood about that type of action,>as once a post is in the public domain, it is virtually there 'forever',>in that sites like wayback can resurrect information that has been>'deleted'.>As far as Chocky goes, I reckon our corporate history is worth preserving,>and the site is the poorer for such action.>~> If people are not prepared to 'own' their post / comments then they>would be better off refraining from posting, instead of potentially corrupting>threads as orphans down the line, or a series of non-sensical replies to>posts that have been 'deleted'.

You are so full of yourself M9. There isn't much difference between orphaned threads and your drivel. If people 'own' their posts then they can delete them as they please.

On 6/10/2012 Patty_Smith wrote:>On 6/10/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:>>>Edward Frillypants.>>He preceeded several others since, by quite a bit timewise, and it is>>one of the things that I have never fully understood about that action,>>as once a post is in the public domain, it is virtually there 'forever',>>in that sites like wayback can resurrect information that has>been>>'deleted'.>>As far as Chocky goes, I reckon our corporate history is worth preserving,>>and the site is the poorer for such action.>>~> If people are not prepared to 'own' their post / comments then they>>would be better off refraining from posting, instead of potentially corrupting>>threads as orphans down the line, or a series of non-sensical replies>to>>posts that have been 'deleted'.>>You are so full of yourself M9. There isn't much difference between orphaned>threads and your drivel. If people 'own' their posts then they can delete>them as they please. >>You can use Wayback to resurrect this whenever you need reminding.>>Hihihihi to infinity.

Interesting first post to Chockstone, Patty_Smith*;... unless you are the reincarnated Edward Frillypants, or one of the other user-id's that have done similar, and been lurking, only now to be 'provoked' into going through the ritual of setting up another ID to respond?
Whatever, I look forward to your ongoing contribution to Chocky, temporary as your posts may be!
☺

(* or possibly Winston Smith, ... a second user-id for himself too, who recently changed id yet again to ZZZZZZZZ to get a rise out of ODH, successfully I might add!)

On 5/10/2012 kuu wrote:>On 11/08/2004 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:>>On 10/08/2004 kieranl wrote:>>>I don't think Noddy was on the first ascent of Lieben with Bryden, I think it was Ted Batty.>>You are right, and my memory stands corrected.>>>>It was back in 1962 ?>>Yes, 1962 according to Bryden's "Guide to Rock-Climbs of NSW". See Chockstone>thread advising this guide now available online;>>http://www.chockstone.org/Forum/Forum.asp?Action=DisplayTopic&ForumID=1&MessageID=114105&replies=2#NewPost>>I'm pretty sure Ted would have been wearing Dunlop Volley sandshoes. Bryden>may have been as well.>
Thanks for the reply and reminding me of the scanned guide.
I notice in that guide that pages (hand-numbered) seem to be missing P72 and P107, but the text appears intact?

Re Bryden's boots, I recall reading somewhere once that the start of the climb was mentioned as being at his boots, presumably because they ended up being left there?
I agree that Dunlop Volleys were the shoe of choice at that time, and unlikely as it seems he may have carried a pair to climb in as extras??
~> The whole scenario could simply be hearsay, and only the first ascentionists could clarify that...
;-)

On 6/10/2012 Cool Hand Lock wrote:>On 6/10/2012 Wendy wrote:>>Well, he didn't do India the climb onsite in India. He might have done>>it onsight in it's actual site in Australia.>>Thanks for the spelling leason Wendy. However as a religious man I am>abided by Timothy 2:12, I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority>over a man. >>So shut it.

Actually the book of Timothy and the verse you refer to, is specifically talking about teaching the word of God about particular issues.>>How ever if there are any valid teachers out there, feel free to correct>my spelling.

On 6/10/2012 Patty_Smith wrote:>On 6/10/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:>>>Edward Frillypants.>>He preceeded several others since, by quite a bit timewise, and it is>>one of the things that I have never fully understood about that type>of action,>>as once a post is in the public domain, it is virtually there 'forever',>>in that sites like wayback can resurrect information that has>been>>'deleted'.>>As far as Chocky goes, I reckon our corporate history is worth preserving,>>and the site is the poorer for such action.>>~> If people are not prepared to 'own' their post / comments then they>>would be better off refraining from posting, instead of potentially corrupting>>threads as orphans down the line, or a series of non-sensical replies>to>>posts that have been 'deleted'.>>You are so full of yourself M9. There isn't much difference between orphaned>threads and your drivel. If people 'own' their posts then they can delete>them as they please. >>You can use Wayback to resurrect this whenever you need reminding.>>Hihihihi to infinity.

I've got to agree with M9 on this front. A similar issue occurred at RC.com with a user named Aric Datesman. He decided to no longer be a part of the online society, deleted all his posts, a few thousand posts, and moved to Mountainproject. While his knowledge, and I reckon he's pretty switched on gear wise, lives on with him and in quoted posts there are plenty of orphaned posts that make little sense. I reckon unless a post is insanely offensive it shouldn't be allowed to be deleted. Plus if you delete everything you look like a ginormous sooky la la who's chucked a tanty, taken 'their' post and left.

Editing is another thing.... If you edit something let people know by popping an 'EDIT' at the bottom of the post with a brief outline of what you've edited. Don't just change the content of your post because it can get really confusing.... And frustrating;(

EDIT: I think you're getting confused with how M9 is using the word 'own'. I read it as owning the idea/statement in a persons post, not that the person actually owns the post. I reckon once uploaded to chocky the post becomes part of chocky. I also reckon a forum shares much the same rules as a conversation; if you're not willing to say something within a group for fear of the consequences, don't post it!

On 6/10/2012 shortman wrote:>Gee ur philosophical these Miguel75. Well said fine sir.

Thanks buddy. I had a mighty fun afternoon with my daughter and friends at Cliffhanger and am feeling that all is right in the world. Unless of course you happen to live in any number of terrible places abounding in the world today, and then I imagine all would not be right.

Let's be done with all of this philosophy and re-engage with the really critical issue - where were Bryden's boots in late 1962. In 1974, Keith Bell and I saw a very old and incredibly tatty pair of climbing shoes hanging on a bolt at the base of Elija on Bluff Mountain and that is where Rick White and Ted Cais assured me they should be - not at the base of Leiben as some have claimed. That observation doesn't prove anything! KUU was climbing in the 'bungles in 1962 but he can't remember or chooses not to remember if Bryden climbed Leiben in rock shoes and I think that is a sensible position to take. Even if Bryden used climbing shoes on Crater Bluff, Ted Batty almost certainly did not and that in itself is pretty incredible. Let's not even ask Bryden to scan his megabrain. What is gained by revising the best story in the history of Australian climbing? As far as I am concerned (Bryden's memories not withstanding), Leiben was climbed by Bryden Allen and Ted Batty in 1962 - in sandshoes.

>KUU was climbing in the 'bungles in 1962 but he can't remember or chooses not to>remember if Bryden climbed Leiben in rock shoes and I think that is a sensible>position to take.>
Thanks Humzoo. You're correct, I can't remember with absolute certainty what happened back then in 1962. But my cautious approach was also designed to allow for those more intimately involved to offer their perspective on events if they chose.

With regard to Ted Batty, does anyone on Chockstone have current contact details for him?

The last I heard, he was dealing with some health issues. Ted was always an unassuming person but it would be great to have him talk about his climbing days -- such as Lieben, Watchtower Crack, and so forth. Maybe climbing historian Bruce Cameron could interview him?

Having done Lieben - with modern gear and boots, and found it one of the most impressive routes I have done, I vote it the hardest australian onsight. Go do it in sandshoes and tell me I'm wrong.

I remember my partner, Brendan Emmerson, doing the first pitch direct - about 17, dodgy rock at times and pretty much fu%k all gear for 40m. I followed him up, with growing respect for what he'd done, got to the belay and said 'good lead' more than I had ever meant it before, and he said 'Not as good as the one you're about to do'. I looked up the shallow groove and was very worried. Fortunately he was wrong - it was tricky, but there was gear.

Seriously, I'm keen to see some pastpointing. I wouldn't have gotten into climbing in the 60's or early 70's. I would have thought, this is fun but it is too scary. Lieben in sandshoes, with gear of the day, would be fu8ing hardcore. It is still, given the cont ext, the most impressive route I have ever done.